backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 25 comment(s) - last by ghost101.. on Jan 31 at 8:33 PM
Intel speeds up the launch of four value processors -- two are dual-core

Intel’s latest roadmap reveals the Pentium E2100 and Celeron 400 series will arrive in Q2’2007 instead of Q3’2007 as previously reported. Two Pentium E2100 models will initially launch – the E2160 and E2140. The E2160 is clocked at 1.80 GHz while the E2140 is clocked at 1.6 GHz. Both models are virtually identical aside from clock speed and have an 800 MHz front-side bus and 1MB of shared L2 cache – half that of the recently released Core 2 Duo E4000 series.

Pentium E 2100
Processor
Number 		Core
Frequency 		Bus
Frequency 		L2
Cache
E2160 1.80GHz 800MHz 1MB
E2140 1.60GHz 800MHz 1MB

Launch pricing information is unavailable in the latest roadmap disappointingly. Nevertheless, expect launch pricing below the current Core 2 Duo E4300’s $163 price tag. Moving into Q3, Intel expects to cut prices on Pentium E2100 series processors. Pricing for Pentium E2160 and E2140 will drop to $84 and $74 respectively in Q3. This places the Pentium E2100 series into the sub-$100 pricing segment.

Celeron 400
Processor
Number 		Core
Frequency 		Bus
Frequency 		L2
Cache
440 2.00 800MHz 512KB
430 1.80GHz 800MHz 512KB

Slotting below the Pentium E 2100 series is the single-core Conroe-L based Celeron 400 series. Intel expects to launch two Celeron 400 models – the 440 and 430. The Celeron 440 and 430 will have 2.0 GHz and 1.8 GHz clock speeds respectively. Celeron 400 series processors feature an 800 MHz front-side bus and 512KB of L2 cache. Launch pricing was unavailable in this roadmap, however, Q3’2007 pricing reveals the Celeron 440 and 430 priced at $59 and $49 respectively.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Dothan based Pentium E's
By mlittl3 on 1/30/2007 3:49:26 PM , Rating: 1
Please correct me if I'm wrong but are these Pentium E series processors based on the Dothan core. Dothan processors were called Pentium M's and all Yonah/Merom/Conroe processors dropped the Pentium name and were called Core/Core 2. I've heard that the Apple TV unit has a dothan based Pentium M in it. Are these processors meant for small form factor budget set top boxes? I mean come on, Dothan cores are like two years old.




RE: Dothan based Pentium E's
By Furen on 1/30/2007 4:11:42 PM , Rating: 2
The Pentium E2000s will be cache-disabled Allendales (dual-core), as far as I know.


RE: Dothan based Pentium E's
By ADDAvenger on 1/30/2007 4:48:57 PM , Rating: 2
Core Duo is based off Dothan, Core 2 Duo is based off Core Duo, and these Pentiums and Celerons are based on Core 2 Duo. Also, these Pentiums and Celerons are all single-core

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=4252


RE: Dothan based Pentium E's
By Anh Huynh on 1/30/2007 4:52:29 PM , Rating: 2
The Pentium E's are dual-core, the single-core E1000 series was canceled.


RE: Dothan based Pentium E's
By mlittl3 on 1/30/2007 6:39:30 PM , Rating: 1
Core Duo is based off of Yonah. The Pentium M is based off of Banias then Dothan.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Core

That is why the use of the Pentium name here is confusing. The Pentium E series are dual core so they definitely aren't Dothan based (dual cores didn't start until Yonah based processors). So why is Intel confusing us even more and falling back to the Pentium name after discontinuing it for Core. Doesn't make any sense.


RE: Dothan based Pentium E's
By coldpower27 on 1/30/2007 6:53:58 PM , Rating: 2
Intel is making the Pentium E line the low end mainstream line above the Celerons, both lines are going to move to Core Architecture based technology. It's not too confusing, it's just tiered. The Core 2 is the premium brand, Pentium is the low end mainstream brand, with the Celeron being the budget brand.

Core 2 Extreme
Core 2 Quad
Core 2 Duo E6xxx
Core 2 Duo E4xxx
Pentium E2xxx
Celeron 4xx


RE: Dothan based Pentium E's
By ghost101 on 1/31/2007 2:05:29 AM , Rating: 2
Core 2 Duo = Merom/Conroe/Allendale.

Core Duo = Yonah. They are two names for the same CPU. Neither one is based on the other.

Similarly, Pentium = Banias or Dothan. The earlier ones were Banias and the updated ones Dothan.

However, Merom and Yonah were indeed based on the Banias/Dothan Cores which were in turn based on old Coppermine cores which were in turn .... (we could go on).

So basically, Pentium E which uses the newest core 2 duo architecture. So im not sure what you mean by your post? Why cant it be based on Dothan cores just how the current core 2 duo processors are?


RE: Dothan based Pentium E's
By ghost101 on 1/31/2007 8:33:09 PM , Rating: 2
Sorry that should say "Pentium M = Banias or Dothan"


RE: Dothan based Pentium E's
By iwod on 1/31/2007 1:20:54 AM , Rating: 2
No they are native 2Mb Cache.


Now we just need some benchmarks...
By Furen on 1/30/2007 3:44:15 PM , Rating: 2
From the few benchmarks that I've looked at, the Celeron parts (Conroe-L) is a horrible performer. I wonder how being cache-crippled will affect the Pentium E2000 series...

Also, since the E4300 is supposed to drop to $111 next quarter I'd expect the E2000 series to be priced well below that.




RE: Now we just need some benchmarks...
By ajfink on 1/30/2007 3:52:17 PM , Rating: 2
That's exactly the point I was trying to make - it doesn't seem to fit to me.


By Scabies on 1/30/2007 3:54:29 PM , Rating: 2
maybe it has a rediculously low power drain, like ~25w

I would hope that anyone shopping for performance knows better than to look to celeron


By coldpower27 on 1/30/2007 6:40:37 PM , Rating: 2
Just what benchmarks have you looked at? Well considering there isn't much room anymore below 113USD, I wouldn't say much below it but, quite cheaper.

Pentium E2xxx is suppose to be 74US and 84US by Q3 2007, so at introduction they will probably take the 84US and 93US price points.

The Celeron's based on Core Architecture are going to be cheap though, they aren't really designed to give a ton of performance. They will give adequate performance levels for their price points, superior to that of the 65nm Celeron D's.


Core-based Celerons
By ajfink on 1/30/2007 3:42:33 PM , Rating: 1
I find the prospect of Core-based Celerons sort of silly. Why make such crippled chips when they can easily produce C2D-named chips that both perform better and can sit at that price point? I guess, perhaps, to make sure the Celeron name is still associated with the budget-end of things.




RE: Core-based Celerons
By Furen on 1/30/2007 3:48:56 PM , Rating: 2
It's not because the Celeron is associated with the budget-end of things but rather because Core 2 is associated with the higher-end parts. If you drop the price of entry you'll dilute the prestige the brand has, not to mention that your low-end parts will cannibalize the high-end's marketshare.


RE: Core-based Celerons
By Khato on 1/31/2007 1:55:30 AM , Rating: 2
The reason is actually rather simple. Die size of a 4MB core 2 duo is 143mm2. If you look at a die shot, you'll see that approximately 2/5 of the core (probably closer to half, but erroring on the side of caution) is the L2 cache. So, about 57.2mm2 is cache, 85.8mm2 is core. Now, the Pentium E's are probably going to just be an Allendale with either a defect in the cache, or deactivated, so should be a core size of about 115mm2.

The Celeron though is most probably going to be a true single core design (or maybe the architecture is such that defective dual cores could be deactivated into functional single cores.) But, most probably, there's going to be a specific single core design for the Celeron. Why? Because take the space taken up by the 4MB of cache and divide by 7 and you get maybe 8mm2 worth of cache. Then divide the core area in half and add it in to get a CPU core that's some 50mm2 in area. So, a nice tiny CPU core (probably about the same size as a sempron on 65nm) that will perform quite well.

Heh, my guess on the cause of the Intel marketshare loss last quarter is that AMD gobbled up the bargain basement. Beneath the core 2 duo, Intel's offerings are pathetic. These new pentiums and celerons will complete Intel's product line and should still have decent margins considering their size.


blarg
By Scabies on 1/30/2007 3:45:23 PM , Rating: 2
am I the only one that wouldnt mind Celeron dying forever? I thought Core Duo (as opposed to Core 2 Duo) was the uber-budget solution. Is this celeron line just 64 bit core duo weakness?

And where is AMD amid all these intel launches? ..waiting for Cebit to drop the r600, a new AMD/ATI rd600-esque chipset, 5 new processor lineups? They've been flat-footed since Core 2 launch, c'mon team!

(btw, I JUST jumped up to 64bit, dual core, DDR2 and crossfire this week, and it's an intel platform, so no fanboyness from this former socket-A nooblet)




RE: blarg
By MonkeyPaw on 1/30/2007 4:46:57 PM , Rating: 2
No, Core Duo is pretty much 2 Dothan cores sharing the same L2. I think the original Duo was Intel's practice run at multi-core CPUs (on the same die, mind you) and a 65nm test run. Core Duo does not have 64bit extensions and various other architectural improvements that are found in Core2 (which has about a 15% IPC improvement over Core1). Core Duo is not budget, but rather a last generation product staring down the EOL barrel.

I think it's funny how everyone rips on Celeron/Sempron based solutions. Not everyone encodes video and plays games all day. My Mom's PC is a Tualatin Celeron with 512mb RAM and a Voodoo 3 video card and it does just great for her--how could a single core Conroe with 512kb of L2 be any worse? I'm chugging along on a newcastle 2800+ and 6100 IGP and couldn't be happier. If Conroe-L runs at super low TDPs, I wouldn't mind snagging one for nothing (along with a quality board and DDR2), OCing the crap out of it, and then upgrading to an affordable Quad when they arrive in late 07.


RE: blarg
By sprockkets on 1/30/2007 11:00:55 PM , Rating: 1
No one really documented the diff btw core duo and the core duo 2. The only change I noticed was the number 2 and twice the cache. The benchmarks prove it as well in the notebooks; the 2 performed like a few hairs better with slightly more battery life.

But the name is weird, people might think the pentium is back and is the better one again haha. Doesn't matter anyhow; AMD has good stuff for now with the better chipsets.


Or even better..
By TimberJon on 1/30/2007 3:59:37 PM , Rating: 2
Why offer two nearly identical CPUs with .2 mhz difference at all? Whats the difference?

Going from 1Ghz to 3Ghz ok you notice a difference.
From 1.6 to 1.8? Cmon.

I agree with the anti-celeron statement. Budget PCs bundled with printers and monitors. Tell your family and friends to not listen!! Best Buy is your enemy, circuit city, your foe. Your IT friend is your FRIEND!




RE: Or even better..
By mlittl3 on 1/30/2007 4:04:05 PM , Rating: 1
Lol! Yeah I guess I won't notice an increase of 0.2 MHz either.


RE: Or even better..
By Scabies on 1/30/2007 4:12:20 PM , Rating: 2
well, we got the e6300 and the e4300, those have minute differences in GHZ (im sure your "mhz" is a typo)
6300 - 1.86 ghz (8x multiplier/233,) w/VT
4300 - 1.80 ghz (9x multiplier/200,) w/o VT

but if you know what you're doing, the 4300 might be more attractive (higher multiplier allows for greater/easier OC)


What chipsets?
By VooDooAddict on 1/31/2007 11:24:03 AM , Rating: 2
What chipsets will these be supported on?

If they are putting out $75 and below CPUs ... we need good motherboards at below $75 that support them.

While I also wish they would let the Celerons and single core CPUs die ... if they are just using "Pentium E" batches where one core doesn't pass validation then it's a good move for Intel on the business side. They will get some return on the "failed" Pentium E runs and maintain market share in the extreme low end. I suspect these will finally compete well with Semprons on the extreme budget side.

There are plenty of people out there happily buying new systems for entertainment based on Semprons and low end video.

I think the future of low end is not in the desktop .. but in laptops. Another poster said it well ... this Celeron will be for the high markup bundles with many mail in rebates. The other business side benefit, people buying those Celeron bundles will have their system go "obsolete" much sooner, so they will need to shop for a complete new system again more frequently.

I'm really looking forward to gaming benchmarks at around 1280x1024 with mid range video on the Pentium Es. ... it could be a nice marketable "budget gaming" solution. (I'm thinking Pentium E + 7600GT or X1650XT.) 17" or 19" LCD, mATX, Pentium E21x0, 945 Chipset Motherboard, X1650XT, 2G DDR-667... nice little setup.




Confusing Article Title (IMHO)
By Kensei on 1/31/2007 4:30:14 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Intel Pentium E2100 and Celeron 400 Launch Pulled In

I've been speaking English for a while now (i.e., my entire life) and I initially thought the article was about Intel delaying the launch of these chips. Only after reading the article did I realize that Intel was accelerating the chips' launch date. I've never heard "pulled in" used as another way of saying "early."

Kensei




Wow.
By Phynaz on 1/30/2007 5:23:11 PM , Rating: 1
Amd can't get break. Intel is hitting them on all fronts.




"Spreading the rumors, it's very easy because the people who write about Apple want that story, and you can claim its credible because you spoke to someone at Apple." -- Investment guru Jim Cramer











botimage
Copyright 2010 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki